Double Craters in Hortensius
Report by Mike Bara

As the earlier reports on the Hortensius region showed, there are significant and unusual features of massive scale present on the surface in this portion of the near side. One interesting facet of these observations is that the structures noted exhibit a very different picture of the nature of these constructs than that observed by earlier work in Sinus Medii (Hoagland) Mare Crisium (Bara, Troy, Fleming) or Tycho (Bara). If the premise of artificial structures on the Moon is scientifically valid, then there are implicit tests of falsification which must be considered and applied. One such test is consistency in the architecture of the objects purported to be artificial. It is not enough to show a single "Glass Dome in Mare Crisium". By itself, no matter how good the image or how numerous the confirmatory frames, a single anomaly will not survive the inevitable second level interrogations. While it's true that the logic employed here by the critics is very weak (i.e. "The Face on Mars" cannot be artificial even though it has two eye sockets, at least one eyebrow, a spherical pupil in the eye, teeth in the mouth, curved lips matching that of a human, a raised nose, nostrils, a headdress with ceremonial markings, a perfectly bi-laterally symmetrical platform, and significant geometric relationships to other equally anomalous objects nearby, because the atmosphere is too thin on Mars to support life as we know it.) it still must be considered and tests must be applied. In short, if there are artificial structures on the Moon, it is likely that the same group or groups would have constructed them and would use the same construction techniques repetitively.

Now, this sort of "second level" questioning is frequently used to impugn or ignore first level proof of artificiality, like rejecting the Lunar data on the basis that none of the Apollo astronauts has admitted to seeing anything unusual. It is also problematic to assume "Aliens" would be consistent in their architecture. There may be socially valid artistic or engineering considerations to make every abode or factory different in appearance, even when the function of the structures are similar. Yet, whether the premise is that the structures are the product of an extraterrestrial civilization, or a technically advanced antediluvian human civilization, seeing the same kinds of buildings in different areas is a strong rebuttal to the idea that all Lunar anomalies have a "natural" explanation. Nature, particularly meteors, are not consistent in their splash patterns. Every impact should have different geometry's and debris distribution.

Fortunately, there are already several cases that pass this test. The "Glass Dome in Mare Crisium" is very near another seemingly crushed dome over Crisium's Picard crater, as reported by Lan Fleming of the VGL group. In addition, there is another such dome on an image yet to be published by Richard Hoagland.

In addition, the massive glass-like structures in the Sinus Medii region are duplicated as far West as the Oceanus Procellarum landing sites of Apollo's 12 and 14. Still, at this point in the literature, there is a lack of specific and clearly defined examples of identical artificial Lunar anomalies.

Until now.

In his Ohio State presentation in May, 1994, Hoagland made note of several examples of "double craters" in the Sinus Medii region on Lunar Orbiter frames LO-III-84M and LO-III-85M. He also showed high resolution close-ups of these parallel aligned double craters, all of nearly identical size and spilt down the middle by a central wall. These figure 8 shaped "craters" would have been weird enough by themselves, but to have several dozen all lined up in parallel rows was astonishing.

In carefully analyzing the data from LO-II-123-M, the Hortensius frame from our earlier report, it seemed that there was a curiously regular pattern emerging on image enhancements. As noted in the previous report, there is an strikingly rectilinear pattern running from the eastern rim of Hortensius and stretching all the way across to Hortensius C, a distance of some 60 kilometers.

The "Factory" (arrow) and rectilinear patterning near Hortensius C.

After getting a close look at the "Factory" and other features on the "M" frame, it was obvious that there was a lot of strange stuff in this area. Fortunately, the Lunar Orbiter series of probes had an ingenious imaging system, which consisted of a dual-lens camera, a film processing unit, a readout scanner, and a film handling apparatus. Both lenses, a 610-mm narrow angle high-resolution (HR) lens and an 80-mm wide-angle medium resolution (MR) lens, placed their frame exposures on a single roll of 70 mm film. The axes of the two cameras were coincident so the area imaged in the HR frames were centered within the MR frame areas. The film was moved during exposure to compensate for the spacecraft velocity, which was estimated by an electric-optical sensor. The film was then processed, scanned, and the images transmitted back to Earth.

The first three Orbiters were used to search for potential landing sites for the Apollo program, and as part of their mission profile were subsequently operating at fairly low altitudes.

The upshot of all this was that the Orbiters could produce extremely high resolution close-ups of the Lunar surface, good enough to clearly recognize objects 3 feet across in some cases, depending on the altitude. In this case, the "H1" and "H2" frames were right across some of the area in question, and seemed a good bet to give us a better picture of just what was down there.

What was "down there," in this case, was more "doubles."

LO-III-123-H2

Sectional Enlargement from LO-III-123-H2

The first of the high resolution "H" frames LO-III-123-H2, showed a field of at least a dozen "double" craters and multiple "arches" and "girders" of the type seen in the "Dish" area. As in the Sinus Medii region, they are all aligned in parallel rows with a central divider splitting them down the middle.

Now, even assuming that there were some natural mechanism which could account for parallel rows of double craters (which there isn't), the simple truth is that there is no way that "nature's randomness" could just happen to bisect them each perfectly at the centerline of symmetry. The only viable explanation for such characteristics is that they are deliberate constructs. Even if they could be somehow explained as collapse features, they simply would not be so consistent in their distribution and size.

By using a "hi-pass" filter to emphasize the edges it becomes a fairly easy process to identify and tag the 12 primary doubles and their equally anomalous surrounding terrain. We will now look at several of these pairs in closer detail with an eye toward the finer features and consistencies among the objects. Each close-up will be identified by its letter designation from the image map above.

Close ups of the area around doubles "A" and "M" reveals that both seem to have internal structures and are accompanied by nearby right angle "arches." In addition, the entire local topography is layered, with support members sticking out from the now collapsed skin.

Doubles "B" and "C" actually seem to have squared off ends, parallel with the central dividing wall and normal to the horizontal edges. We also see more of the tiered topography first noticed in the "Factory" area and reminiscent of deliberately landscaped terrain. Again, this kind of geometry just does not show itself in natural formations on such a repetitive and symmetrical pattern.

A closer look at the area between doubles "E" (partially obscured by the reseau mark) and "J" emphasizes the linear patterning all across the ground. Note that it is not aligned with either the framelets or the grain of the film, and seems to encompass numerous rectangular depressions. There are also wispy, glass-like remnants scattered about, similar again to what was observed by Hoagland in the Sinus Medii region. This whole area seems to be exposed substructure supporting a "false" lunar floor.

In addition, there is another area in this frame with an astonishing zig-zag pattern of walls. These seem to be just below surface and cannot be accounted for by impacts or volcanic activity. So, what are they? Well, they're walls.

All in all, this frame is clear cut confirmation of Hoagland's previous observations of "Doubles" in the Sinus Medii region and even outside the Hortensius anomalies previously documented, stands as a stunning indictment of the current model of Lunar geology. The mere presence of such inexplicable repetitive features where there should be none by the current orthodoxy sounds a death knell for the conventional "dead" model of the Moon. But, we aren't done yet.

LO-III-123-H1

Frame LO-III-123-H1 is absolutely littered with hundreds of "Doubles," "Arches" and support structures. There are so many anomalous features in this frame that it is literally impossible to catalog them all. Instead, we will focus on just a few of the truly bizarre.

Again note the numerous arch-like structures and underlying "support beams" just below the surface regolith. There are multitudes of "square craters," equally spaced knobs and features jutting out from beside the large "Double" in the center of the frame, and at least one astonishing "ruined building."

This mulitlayered area appears exactly as a modern apartment or office building with the front ripped off by some force of nature. What we appear to be seeing is the substructure of the Lunar surface itself, exposing the room sized cells of this mutually reinforcing structure.

SUMMARY

There is flatly no conventional explanation for these features. Combined with the numerous other documented anomalies in the area of Hortensius crater, it seems obvious that this region -- encompassing more than a hundred square miles -- is an artificial edifice. It is designed to look like a cratered planetary surface but in fact disguising a multi-layered, organized subsurface complex or base.

This is but one of numerous upcoming reports which will detail further evidence supporting this same conclusion for other areas of the Moon.

© 1998 MICHAEL BARA